tv House Rules Committee Continues Work on Funding Tax Bills CSPAN December 20, 2017 9:22am-9:39am EST
>> senate republican leaders, bill, the tax reform 51-48. the house is back at 10 a.m. eastern for a revote. "the washington post" writing that the house passed it a version of the bill to 27-203. but the effort hit a snag when the senate parliamentarian ruled that three provisions violated the chamber's bird rule guidelines on what types of legislation can pass with a simple 50 majority vote. the senate made minor tweaks and
the house will reconsider the bill today. it had to come up this morning before the rules committee, under 20 minutes here. . >> the committee will be providing a knack for reconciliation pursuant to five, pursuant to the budget reconciliation, also known as the tax and jobs act. the united states senate, on the vote of 51-48 has to be jobs act
in the interest of the american people. during consideration of this legislation, several positions -- provisions were removed because of the bird rule, also used during reconciliation. strikest change made, sling which that allows 529 accounts to be used for homeschool expenses. that was struck. the second change modifies the an excisethat imposes tax on the investment income of certain educational institutions. the change strikes a reference to tuition-paying students, to the taxexception available only if the institution has less than 500 students, or if 50% or less of the students are located in the united states.
both very narrow provisions, nonetheless, under senate rules, they need to be reverted. they were struck. -- revoted. they were struck. change is to change the title. these are the only changes to the bill. allow us towill advance the amended conference report to ensure all americans can benefit and see that what we're trying to accomplish today is to revote the bill with final changes. 227-203 tooted advance this legislation. we are bringing it back for that purpose. to the rank and member committee. i in the interest of harmony, want to make a couple of points. i am trying to figure out how we -- the speaker had
said this was a -- was a once in a lifetime opportunity. here we are, working on this two days in a row. i am not sure what happened that congress -- the conference. it is supposed to reconcile those bills. we are taking a beating in the media. that after all these years, we couldn't even get that right. >> what happened is the changedce report , andal of the provisions they voted on them. discovered -- that
is what conferences are for. that is what conferences are for. i know we have to get on with it. >> we will meet at 4:00. >> you will tommy, as soon as you know -- tell me, as soon as you know. . >> as soon as this committee knows, we try to share information across lines. >> you have been very good. >> the gentleman from massachusetts has been talking to me at three in the morning. >> [indiscernible] >> [crosstalk] does no good to wear out this team when we could be here at 7 a.m. i appreciate working with you. i saw you on the floor yesterday. >> yes.
>> further comments? >> i yield back. >> the gentleman from georgia. >> i move the committee print april -- grant a rule to provide the consideration of the tax for the pool -- rule fives the motion should be considered as read, 20 minutes of debate on by motion, equally divided the ranking minority members. the committee on ways and means, and the rule provided by rule 21 should not apply. >> is there an amendment or discussion? >> the gentleman from colorado. >> i want the house to concur
resolution 97, and the house of representatives to make corrections to hr-1. i am glad this is coming back to our community. we have another opportunity to added some of the provisions that are important to businesses in my district and across the country. provisions,nor rule,tent with the bird as well as the types of provisions that are being changed at this point. these are not material, in the sense that they affect the economics of the deal. but they will make the bill better. what thist that is committee tries to do. i don't believe that any of these will interfere in any way with the passage in the senate.
i would hope that we would take this opportunity to approve the with some of the provisions that i have had the ,pportunity to discuss including the act based on the favorite beverage of the rules committee. bucha -- very important to producers, in my district and frankly across the country. i would bring our laws in line with the european union and many of the jurisdictions with regard to taxes for this popular health beverage. , it would address the use of crypto currencies. i know some members of the committee have regulatory issues. those cannot be included in the tax bill. it would simply provide an
exemption. in practice, people who purchase coffee and kleptocracy are not filing an irs. this issue would provide them those exemptions. and crypto currency are not filing an irs. this issue would provide them those exemptions. i also have a whopping expense deduction -- lobbying expense deduction. --ht now, lobbying expenses corporations lobbying the executive branch are not deductible.
this is taxpayers to lobby us. this bill removes the deductibility around lobbying state and local governments. but we are hearing congress, the ones who are passing this bill -- here in congress, the ones who are passing the spell. the only type of activity that should be deductible is corporations lobbying us. they should be able to deduct legislative lobbying expenses. i believe this makes the bill look better. congress -- ibout think this is something that can inspire public confidence. testimony withe chairman brady, urgent,
regarding the deductibility of business expenses for marijuana businesses, the legalization of marijuana, nothing to do with the deductibility of marijuana. simply, the legal business expenses, meeting payroll, businesses in my state -- and over 30 states now have some for of medicinal or legal marijuana or cannabanoids. this is an urgent issue for my district. sponsored by senator gardner and has strong bipartisan support in both chambers. i think this will make the bill better. it gives the same opportunity to succeed.
i know that is the goal in many ways of this legislation. we have a class of businesses that pay an effective tax rate of over 70%. this is the last chance to fix it. it is hard to pass tax bills. process for doing that. us see this as a vehicle for tax legislation. if you recall, mr. o'grady -- wasbrady and mr. o'neill, i happy when this was championed by tim scott and a number of others. difference.ke a a lacklly in areas with of capital investment. this is the vehicle. this concurrent resolution will not jeopardize the passage in any way.
materialot affect any ways of the bill. this is on parts of the legislative and executive branches, as well as the state and local government. i hope that we will take this opportunity to revisit it, to at least present the members of the house with the opportunity to pass this concurrent resolution, conjunction -- in conjunction with hr-1. thank you. is there additional discussion? i want to make sure i am looking at everyone, and the gentleman from colorado, thank you. >> i am a cosponsor of the legislation you are mentioning. this is not the time and the place for this particular legislation.
i will respectfully oppose your amendment. there are unintended consequences of treating the forjuana businesses, medicinal and recreational purposes, equally. we have a black market and free market in colorado, that exists because the cost of producing far belowillegally is the cost of producing marijuana legally in a regulated market. we take this issue seriously. this issue will be addressed. would go down unnecessarily. the tax bill that we are dealing with is going to be a great bill for many businesses in this country. with respect, i oppose your amendment. >> thank you.
the gentleman from massachusetts. >> we believe this bill is a giveaway to corporations and the wealthy in this country. out. you for pointing that >> judge, a new hat? >> [indiscernible] >> there you go. we have the amendment from the gentleman for colorado. those who vote? aye. those who oppose? no.